US008528778B2
`
`(12) United States Patent
`Giraud
`
`(10) Patent N0.:
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`*Sep. 10, 2013
`
`(54) RESEALABLE MOISTURE TIGHT
`CONTAINER ASSEMBLY FOR STRIPS AND
`THE LIKE HAVING A LIP SNAP SEAL
`
`(56)
`
`References Cited
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`.
`(75) Inventor: Jean Pierre Giraud, Pans (FR)
`
`6/1935 F ka
`2,003,355 A
`2,175,673 A “M939 s?eljs
`
`(73) Assignee: CSP Technologies, Inc., Amsterdam,
`NY (Us)
`
`(Continued)
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`( * ) Notice:
`
`Subject‘ to any disclaimer, the term of this patent 1s extended or adjusted under 35
`
`U.S.C. 154(1)) by 0 days.
`This patent is subject to a terminal dis-
`
`_
`Al
`(Con?rmed)
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`clalmer'
`(21) Appl_ No; 13/533,233
`
`(22) Filed:
`
`Jun. 26, 2012
`
`Amended and Uni?ed Answer and Af?rmative Defenses t0 1 Com
`plaint and Counterclaim against CSP Technologies, Inc., ?led by
`Defendants Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie Inc. and Airsec S.A.S.
`(LBT) (Entered: Dec. 2, 2011).
`
`(65)
`
`Prior Publication Data
`
`(Continued)
`
`Apr‘ 25’ 2013
`Us 2013/0098934 A1
`Related US. Application Data
`(63) Continuation of application No. 12/425,590, ?led on
`Apr. 17, 2009, now abandoned, which is a continuation
`of application No. 11/171,171, ?led on Jun. 30, 2005,
`now Pat.
`No.
`7,537,137,
`which is
`a
`continuation-impart Of application NO- 10/683,311,
`?led 011 Oct 10, 2003, HOW Pat N0~ 7,213,720
`(60) Provisional application No. 60/417,533, ?led on Oct.
`10, 2002
`
`(2006.01)
`
`(51) Int. C1.
`B65D 43/18
`(52) US. Cl.
`USPC .... .. 220/839; 220/259. 1; 220/4.21; 220/2.23;
`221/45; 221/63; 206/535
`(58) Field of Classi?cation Search
`USPC ............ .. 220/839, 259.1, 4.21, 4.23; 221/45,
`221/63; 206/535
`See application ?le for complete search history.
`
`Primary Examiner * J. Gregory Pickett
`Assistant Examiner * Raven Collins
`(74) Attorney’ Agent’ or Firm * Greenberg Traurig’ LLP
`
`ABSTRACT
`(57)
`A substantially moisture tight container and lid assembly for
`storing and packaging moisture-sensitive items comprising
`an assembly with a container and a lid, the lid is attached by
`a hinge to an upper housing Portion of the Container’ the lid
`includes a lip seal member that depends downwardly from the
`lid, the lip seal member is con?gured to abut at least a portion
`of the interior side of the container when the lid is in the closed
`position resulting in a substantially moisture tight seal
`between the lid and the lid, and the container assembly further
`comprising a base portion and an upper housing portion, the
`upper housing portion is capable of being snap-?t into the
`base portion by employing a lip seal mechanism to form a
`substantially moisture-tight seal.
`
`7 Claims, 10 Drawing Sheets
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 1
`
`

`

`US 8,528,778 B2
`Page 2
`
`(56)
`
`References Cited
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`Cressaty
`10/1941
`2,258,540
`Tupper
`10/1954
`2,690,861
`11/1957
`2,814,404
`Towns
`Gowdy et al.
`1/1966
`3,227,332
`Eddy
`6/1966
`3,255,907
`3,272,368
`9/1966
`Van Baarn
`3,441,161
`4/1969
`Van Vaarn
`3,784,055
`Anderson
`1/1974
`3,848,780
`Stull
`11/1974
`Aichinger
`3,899,097
`8/1975
`3,967,756
`Barish
`7/1976
`3,986,479
`Bonk
`10/1976
`3,994,417
`Boedecker
`11/1976
`Deffeyes
`4,036,360
`7/1977
`4,043,475
`Wheeler
`8/1977
`4,281,778
`Stull
`8/1981
`4,380,304
`Anderson
`4/1983
`4,730,731
`Allison
`3/1988
`Heverly et al.
`4,746,008
`5/1988
`4,759,463
`MaZoin
`7/1988
`4,778,071
`Fillmore
`10/1988
`4,783,056
`Abrams
`11/1988
`4,807,425
`Abrams
`2/1989
`4,812,116
`Abrams
`3/1989
`4,869,387
`9/1989
`Perrson
`Langham
`4,883,056
`11/1989
`4,890,742
`Allison
`1/1990
`4,964,539
`Mueller
`10/1990
`5,033,635
`Batchelor
`7/1991
`5,108,029
`4/1992
`Abrams et al.
`5,114,003
`5/1992
`J ackish et al.
`5,133,470
`7/1992
`Abrams et al.
`Tyranski
`9/1992
`5,145,646
`1/1995
`5,379,897
`Muckenfuchs et al.
`8/1995
`5,437,386
`Von Holdt
`5,474,177
`Abrams et al.
`Julius
`5,542,567
`5,553,739
`Plum et al.
`Rapcahk et al.
`5,667,094
`IshikaWa
`5,699,912
`Abrams
`5,723,085
`5,788,064
`Sacherer
`5,842,486
`Davis et al.
`5,911,937
`Hekal
`6,080,350
`Hekal
`6,092,690
`Bitowft
`6,124,006
`Hekal
`6,130,263
`Hekal
`6,174,952
`Hekal et al.
`6,214,255
`Hekal
`6,221,446
`Hekal
`D443,450
`Ruhotas
`VerWeyest
`6,299,033
`6,303,064
`Abrams et al.
`RE37,676
`Abrams
`6,364,101
`Schultz
`6,394,298
`Zaidman
`6,412,634
`Telesca et al.
`6,486,261
`Wu et al.
`6,613,405
`Hekal
`6,769,558
`BucholtZ
`Hagen et al.
`6,872,358
`6,951,292
`Bando et al.
`7,005,459
`Hekal
`7,213,720
`Giraud
`7,537,137
`Giraud
`7,753,228
`Yuhara
`Donegan
`2002/0185404
`Mavin
`2003/0173325
`Giraud
`2004/0173612
`Giraud
`2005/0258174
`Yuhara
`2006/0196524
`BroZell
`2007/0023317
`
`2007/0090106 A1
`2009/0200326 A1
`2009/0236357 A1
`
`4/2007 Yuhara et al.
`8/2009 Giraud et al.
`9/2009 Giraud et al.
`
`DE
`DE
`DE
`DE
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`EP
`GB
`GB
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`JP
`KR
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`WO
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`19546684
`6/1997
`19546684 A1
`6/1997
`29705720
`6/1997
`29705720 U1
`6/1997
`0079816
`5/1983
`0079816 A1
`5/1983
`0208413
`1/1987
`0208413 A2
`1/1987
`0328809
`8/1989
`0328809 A1
`8/1989
`0454967
`11/1991
`0454967 B1
`11/1991
`0857665 A1
`8/1998
`0916595 A2
`5/1999
`1582476 A1 10/2005
`1595813 A1 11/2005
`2205348
`12/1988
`2205348 A 12/1988
`07-017748 U
`3/1995
`08230920
`9/1996
`08230920 A
`9/1996
`08337260
`12/1996
`08337260 A 12/1996
`0912064
`1/1997
`0912064 A
`1/1997
`2002154594
`11/2000
`2002154594 A
`5/2002
`2004-299753 A 10/2004
`2006-502062 A
`1/2006
`10-2011-0002347 A
`1/2011
`91/12181 A1
`8/1991
`94/08872 Al
`4/1994
`96/33108 A1
`10/1996
`9633108
`10/1996
`00/46118 A1
`8/2000
`0046118
`8/2000
`01/53058 A1
`7/2001
`0153058
`7/2001
`01/94240 A1
`12/2001
`0194240
`12/2001
`2004/026728 A1
`4/2004
`2004/033339 A1
`4/2004
`2004033339
`4/2004
`2005/074571 A2
`8/2005
`2006/045087 A2
`4/2006
`2006045087
`4/2006
`2006/137176 A1
`12/2006
`2008/122771 A1
`10/2008
`2008122771
`10/2008
`2008/146171 A2 12/2008
`2008/153953 A1
`12/2008
`2008/153954 A1
`12/2008
`2008146171
`12/2008
`2008153953
`12/2008
`2008153954
`12/2008
`2009/125267 A1
`10/2009
`2009125267
`10/2009
`
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`Answer to 62 Counterclaim, ?led by CSP Technologies, Inc.
`(McAndreWs, George) Modi?ed on Dec. 22, 2011 (LBT). (Entered:
`12/2112011).
`Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings for Failure to State a Claim
`Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) and
`Motion to Strike, ?led by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc. (Attach
`ments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(McAndreWs, George) Modi?ed
`on Mar. 27, 2012 (LBT). (Entered: Mar. 26, 2012).
`Brief/ Memorandum in Support re 75 Motion for Judgment on the
`Pleadings for Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
`12(b)(6) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) and Motion to Strike, ?led by
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc. (McAndreWs, George) Modi?ed on
`Mar. 27, 2012 (LBT). (Entered: Mar. 26, 2012).
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 2
`
`

`

`US 8,528,778 B2
`Page 3
`
`Reply in Support of Motion re 70 Motion for Leave to File Second
`Amended and Uni?ed Answer, Af?rmative Defenses and Counter
`claims, ?led by Defendants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc. (Attachments: Exhibits 1-13 (Carroll, Jan) (Entered:
`Apr. 23, 2012).
`Response in Opposition re 75 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
`for Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and
`Fed R. Civ. P. 12(c) and Motion to Strike Motion for Judgment on the
`Pleadings for Failure to State a Claim Pursuant to Fed R. Civ. P.
`12(b)(6) and Fed R. Civ. P. 12(c) and Motion to Strike , ?led by
`Defendants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.. (Car
`roll, Jan) (Entered:Apr. 23, 2012).
`Joint Claim Construction Statement , ?led by Plaintiff CSP Tech
`nologies, Inc.. (McAndreWs, George) (Entered: Oct. 23, 2012).
`Joint Claim Construction StatementiSupplemental, ?led by Plain
`tiff CSP Technologies, Inc.. (McAndreWs, George) (Entered:
`1110112012).
`Entry on CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Partial Motion for Judgment on
`the PleadingsiDefendants’ inequitable conduct counterclaim, des
`ignated as Counterclaim IV in Defendants’ Amended Counterclaim,
`must be dismissed. 75 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is
`Granted. See Entry for details. Signed by Judge Richard L.Young on
`Nov. 2, 2012. (LBT) (Entered: Nov. 2, 2012).
`Af?davit in Support of Motion re 100 Initial Markman/Claim Con
`struction Brief by CSP Technologies, Inc. Declaration of George P.
`McAndreWs, ?led by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.(Attachments:
`Exhibits 1-10) (McAndreWs, George) (Entered: 11112/2012).
`Af?davit in Support of Motion re 100 Initial Markman/Claim Con
`struction Brief by CSP Technologies, Inc. Declaration of Dr. Tim A.
`Osswald, ?led by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: #
`Exhibit AiExpert Report of Dr. Tim A. OssWald)(McAndreWs,
`George) (Entered: Nov. 12, 2012).
`Motion for Summary Judgment (Partial) of Direct Infringement, ?led
`by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: # Text of Pro
`posed Order)(McAndreWs, George) (Entered: Nov. 12, 2012).
`Brief/Memorandum in Support re 103 Motion for Summary Judg
`ment (Partial) of Direct Infringement , ?led by Plaintiff CSP Tech
`nologies, Inc. (McAndreWs, George) (Entered: 11112/2012).
`Af?davit in Support of Motion re 103 Motion for Summary Judgment
`(Partial) of Direct Infringement Declaration of George P.
`McAndreWs, ?led by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.. (Attach
`ments: Exhibits 1-7) (McAndreWs, George) (Entered: Nov. 12,
`2012).
`Af?davit in Support of Motion re 1 03 Motion for Summary Judg
`ment (Partial) of Direct Infringement Declaration of Dr. Tim A.
`Osswald, ?led by Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.. (Attachments: #
`Exhibit AiExpert Report of Dr. Tim A. OssWald)(McAndreWs,
`George) (Entered: Nov. 12, 2012).
`Motion for Summary Judgment ofNoninfringement or Invalidity of
`the Patent-in-suit, ?led by Defendants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie
`AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.. (Fritsch, Paula) (Entered: Nov. 12, 2012).
`Brief/Memorandum in Support re 107 Motion for Summary Judg
`ment of Noninfringement or Invalidity of the Patent-in-suit , ?led by
`Defendants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc..
`(Attachments: Exhibits 1-20) (Fritsch, Paula) Modi?ed on Nov. 13,
`2012 to remove duplicate Wording (LBT). (Entered: Nov. 12, 2012).
`Initial Markman/Claim Construction Brief by All Defendants.
`(Attachments: Exhibits 1-10)(Fritsch, Paula) (Entered: Nov. 12,
`2012).
`Exhibit in Support of 112 Response in Opposition 103 Motion for
`Summary Judgment (Partial) of Direct Infringement , ?led by Defen
`dants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. (Exhibit
`8aiREbuttal Expert Report of Neil Sheehan). (Attachments: Exhib
`its 8b-12) (Carroll, Jan) Modi?ed on Dec. 14, 2012 LBT). (Entered:
`Dec. 13,2012).
`Response in Opposition re 107 Motion for Summary Judgment of
`Noninfringement or Invalidity of the Patent-in suit, ?led by Plaintiff
`CSP Technologies, Inc.. (McAndreWs, George) (Entered: Dec. 13,
`2012).
`Af?davit re 115 Response in Opposition to 107 Motion for Summary
`Judgment Declaration of George P. McAndreWs by CSP Technolo
`
`gies, Inc. (Attachments: Exhibits 1-4)(McAndreWs, George) Modi
`?ed on Dec. 14, 2012 to create link to related document (LBT).
`(Entered: Dec. 13, 2012).
`Af?davit re 1 15 Response in Opposition to 107 Motion for Summary
`Judgment (Declaration of Dr. Tim A. OssWald) by CSP Technologies,
`Inc. . (Attachments: Exhibit AiResponsive Expert Report of Dr. Tim
`A. OssWald) (McAndreWs, George) Modi?ed on Dec. 14, 2012 to
`create link to related document (LBT). (Entered: Dec. 13, 2012).
`Response re 100 Claim Construction Brief, ?led by Defendants
`Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. (Attachments:
`Exhibits 11-12)(Fritsch, Paula) Modi?ed on Dec. 14, 2012 to create
`link to related document (LBT). (Entered: Dec. 13, 2012).
`Reply in Support of Motion re 107 Motion for Summary Judgment of
`Noninfringement or Invalidity of the Patent-in-suit, ?led by Defen
`dants Airsec S.A.S., Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.. (Attach
`ments: Exhibits 21-24) (Fritsch, Paula) (Entered: Jan. 3, 2013).
`European Search Report for European Patent No. 101559730 dated
`Jul. 8, 2010.
`International Search Report and the Written Opinion of the Interna
`tional Searching Authority, or the Declaration, in International appli
`cation No. PCT/US2012/025813, dated Dec. 6, 2012. (8 pages).
`PCT Noti?cation of Transmittal of International Search Report and
`Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, in Interna
`tional application No. PCT/EP2010/062357, dated Aug. 24, 2010.
`The Patent Of?ce of the People’s Republic of China, Noti?cation of
`First Of?ce Action, in application No. CN200780038497.4, dated
`Mar. 23, 2010.
`Canadian Intellectual Property Of?ce, Of?ce Action in Canadian
`Application No. 2662751, dated Mar. 24, 2011.
`International Preliminary Report on Patentability corresponding to
`International Application No. PCT/U S2007/ 077702, mailed Mar. 19,
`2009.
`European Patent Of?ce, Communication With extended European
`Search Report in International Application No. 110751898-1261/
`2386496, dated Dec. 22, 2011.
`Japanese Patent Of?ce, Notice of Reason(s) for Rejection, in Japa
`nese Patent Application No. 2009-527556, dated Aug. 7, 2012, With
`translation.
`Conclusions pour La Societe Airsec, Defenderesse, contre La societe
`CSP Technologies, Demanderesse, Tribunal de grande instance de
`Paris, 3e chamber, 1e section, Role No. 11/06900, Signi?ees via
`e-barreau le Dec. 14, 2011 (Pleading on Behalf of Airsec, Defendant,
`Against CSP Technologies, Claimant, Tribunal de Grande Instance of
`Paris, 3"’ Chamber, 1“ Section, Docket No. 11/06900, Served via
`e-barreau on Dec. 14, 2011); 104 Pages.
`Judgement rendu le Feb. 28, 2013, Demanderesses Societe CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Defenderesse Societe Airse, SAS, Tribunal de
`grande instance de Paris, 3eme chambre, 1ere section, No. RG:
`11/06900 (Judgement of Feb. 28, 2013, Claimants CSP Technolo
`gies, Inc., Defendant Airsec SAS, Paris District Court, 3rd Division,
`Section 1, Docket No. 11/06900); 60 pgs.
`Brief No. 2, Paris District Court, Parties: CSP Technologies, Inc., v.
`Airsec, Defendant, To Their Honors the President and Judges of the
`Paris District Court (3rd Division, Section 1) Docket No. 11/06900
`?led and served Jan. 21, 2013; 307 pages.
`Conclusions pour La societe Airse, Defenderess, contre La societe
`CSP Technologies, Demanderesse, Tribunal de grande instance de
`Paris, 3e chambre, 1e section, Role No. 11/06900, Signi?ees via
`e-barreau le Jan. 11, 2013 (Pleading on Behalf of Airsec, Defendant,
`Against CSP Technologies, Claimant, and Capital Europe, Voluntar
`ily joining party, Tribunal de Grande Instance of Paris, 3rd Chamber,
`1st Section, Docket No. 11/06900, Served via e-barreau on Jan. 11,
`2013); 381 pages.
`Conclusions pour La Societe Airsec, Defenderesse, contre La societe
`CSP Technologies, Demanderesse, Tribunal de grande instance de
`Paris, 3e chamber 1e section, Role No. 11/06900, Signi?ees via
`e-barreau le Dec. 14, 2011 (Pleading on Behalf of Airsec, Defendant,
`Against CSP Technologies, Claimant, Tribunal de Grande Instance of
`Paris, 3rd Chamber, 1st Section, Docket No. 11/06900, Served via
`e-barreau on Dec. 14, 2011); 104 Pages.
`Brief No. 1, Paris District Court, Parties, CSP Technologies, Inc., V
`Airsec, Defendant, To Their Honors the President and Judges of the
`Paris District Court (3rd Division, Section 1), Docket No. 11/06900
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 3
`
`

`

`US 8,528,778 B2
`Page 4
`
`(General List), Hearing to close the procedural stage of proceedings
`on Jan. 22, 2012 at 3:30 p.m., Filed and Served on Nov. 15, 2012.
`Conclusions Aux Fins De Sursis a Statuer devant le Tribunal de
`grande instance de Paris, Pour La Societe CSP Technlogies, Inc.,
`Demanderesse, Contre La Societe Airsec, Defenderesse, 3eme
`chambre, lere section, RG No. 11/06900, Audience due May 16,
`2012 (Motion for a Stay of Proceedings Before the Court of First
`Instance of Paris, for CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff Against
`Airsec, Defendant, 3rd chamber, 1st section, RG No. 11/06900, Hear
`ing ofMay 16, 2012 (15 pages).
`Order No. 9: Initial Determination Granting Motion to Withdraw
`Complaint and Terminate Investigation, in the Matter of Certain
`Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same, United States Interna
`tional Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-779, Aug. 29,
`2011, (5 pages).
`Order No. 8: Granting Unoppo sed Motion to Stay All Pending Dead
`lines, in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the
`Same, United States International Trade Commission, Investigation
`No. 337-TA-779, Aug. 19, 2011, (3 pages).
`Order No. 5: Setting Target Date of Sep. 24, 2012 in the Matter of
`Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same, United States
`International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-779, Jul.
`21, 2011, (2 pages).
`Order No. 4: Requesting Position of Parties on Target Date by Jul. 20,
`2011 and Suspending Preliminary Conference, in the Matter of Cer
`tain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same, United States
`International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-779, Jul.
`18, 2011, (2 pages).
`Order No. 1: Notice of Ground Rules, Setting Jul. 18, 2011 Date for
`Discovery Statements, and Jul. 28, 2011 Date for Preliminary Con
`ference, in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using
`the Same, United States International Trade Commission, Investiga
`tion No. 337-TA-779, Jun. 17, 2011, (6 pages).
`Response and Af?rmative Defenses of Sud-Chemie AG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc., and Airsec S.A.S. To Complaint and Notice of Inves
`tigation, in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using
`the Same, United States International Trade Commission, Investiga
`tion No. 337-TA-779, Jul. 11, 2011, (51 pages).
`Sud-Chemie AG’s, Sud-Chemie Inc.’s, and Airsec S.A.S’s First Set
`of Interro gatories Nos. 1-44 to Complaintant CSP Technologies, Inc .,
`in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same,
`United States International Trade Commission, Investigation No.
`337-TA-779, Jun. 30, 2011, (26 pages).
`Sud-Chemie AG’s, Sud-Chemie Inc.’s, and Airsec S.A.S’s First Set
`of Requests for Production of Documents and Things Nos. 1-106 To
`Complaintant CSP Technologies Inc., in the Matter of Certain Flip
`Top Vials and Products Using the Same, United States International
`Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-779, Jun. 30, 2011,
`(28 pages).
`Complainant CSP Technologies, Inc.’s First Set of Interrogatories to
`Respondents Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S.,
`in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same,
`United States International Trade Commission, Investigation No.
`337-TA-779, Jun. 30, 2011, (28 pages).
`Complainant CSP Technologies, Inc.’s First Set of Requests for
`Production of Documents and Things to Respondents Sud-Chemie
`AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.and Airsec S.A.S., in the Matter of Certain
`Flip-Top Vials and Products Using the Same, United States Interna
`tional Trade Commission, Investigation No. 337-TA-779, Jun. 30,
`2011, (32 pages).
`Complaint of CSP Technologies, Inc. Under Section 337 of the Tariff
`Act of 1930, As Amended, in the Matter of Certain Flip-Top Vials and
`Products Using the Same, Public Version, United States International
`Trade Commission, May 16, 2011, (33 pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Reply in Support of Its Motion for
`Partial Summary Judgement of Direct In?ngement, in the Matter of
`CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie,
`Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States District Court
`for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil
`Action No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jan. 3, 2013, (23 pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’ s Responsive Markman Brief, in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States
`
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4: 11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Dec. 13, 2012, (23
`pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Opening Markman Brief, in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG Sud
`Chemie Inc. and AIRSEC S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Nov. 11, 2012, (29
`pages).
`Responsive Expert Report of Dr. Tim A. Osswald, in the Matter of
`CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-ChemieInc.
`and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for
`the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action
`No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Oct. 12, 2012, (91 pages).
`Rebuttal Expert Report and Declaration of Neil Sheehan, Redacted
`Version, in the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintff, v. Sud
`Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the
`United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New
`Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Oct.
`12, 2012, (73 pages).
`Expert Report and Declaration of Neil Sheehan, Redacted Version, in
`the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG,
`Sud-Chemie Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Aug. 13, 2012,
`(310 pages).
`Sud-Chemie AG’s, Sud-Chemie Inc.’s, and Airsec S.A.S’s First Set
`of Requests for Production of Documents and Things Nos. 1-82 to
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc., in the Matter of CSP Technologies,
`Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. andAirsec S.A.S,
`Defendants, In the United States District Court for the Southern
`District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv
`00029-RLY-WGH, Jul. 3, 2012, (30 pages).
`Sud-Chemie AG’s, Sud-Chemie Inc.’s, and Airsec S.A.S’s First Set
`of Interro gatories Nos. 1- 14 to Plaintiff CSP Technologies Inc ., in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud
`Chemie Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States Dis
`trict Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division,
`Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jul. 3, 2012, (14 pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Reply in Support of Its Partial
`Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings for Failure to State a Claim
`Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) and
`Motion to Strike, in the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v.
`Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in
`the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
`New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH,
`May 10, 2012, (14 pages).
`Order on Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended
`and United Answer, Af?rmative Defenses, and Counterclaims, in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, May 2, 2012, (7
`pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Opposition to Defendeant Sud
`Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S.’ s Motion for Leave
`to File a Second Amended and Uni?ed Answer, Af?rmative
`Defenses, and CounterClaims, in the Matter of CSP Technologies,
`Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. andAirsec S.A.S,
`Defendants, in the United States District Court for the Southern
`District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv
`00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 19, 2012, (25 pages).
`Smith, John D., Sud-Chemie AG’s, Sud-Chemie Inc.’s, and Airsec
`S.A.S.’s Preliminary Invalidity Contentions, Mar. 30, 2012, pp. 1-31,
`Exhibits 20-21, 23-24, 27, 30-31, 33, C, D, F-L, Civ. Action 4: 1 1-cv
`00029-RLY-WGH, New Albany, IN.
`Order on Case Management Plan, in the Matter of CSP Technologies,
`Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. andAirsec S.A.S,
`Defendants, In the United States District Court for the Southern
`District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv
`00029-RLY-WGH, Nov. 29, 2011, (3 pages).
`Defendants’ Unopposed Motion to Stay, in the Matter of CSP Tech
`nologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 4
`
`

`

`US 8,528,778 B2
`Page 5
`
`Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States District Court for the
`Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No.
`4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 23, 2011, (51 pages).
`Reply in Support of Notice of Related Case; in the Matter of CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.
`and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for
`the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action
`No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 17, 2011, (22 pages).
`Declaration of George P. McAndrews in Support of Plaintiff CSP
`Technologies, Inc.’s Opposition to Defendant Sud-Chemin AG’s
`Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, in the Matter of
`CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie,
`Inc. andAirsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court
`for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil
`Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 15, 2011, (27 pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Opposition to Defendant Sud
`Chemie AG’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jursidiction, in
`the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG,
`Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 15, 2011, (27
`pages).
`Declaration of Robert S. Abrams in Support of Plaintiff CSP Tech
`nologies, Inc.’s Opposition to Defendant Sud-Chemie AG’s Motion
`to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, in the Matter of CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.
`and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States District Court for
`the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action
`No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 15, 2011, (8 pages).
`Answer to Defendants and Counterclaim Plaintiffs Sud-Chemie, Inc.
`’s and Airsec S.A.S.’s Counterclaims, in the Matter of CSP Technolo
`gies, Inc., Paintff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec
`S.A.S, Defendants, in the United States District Court for the South
`ern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1
`cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Jun. 15, 2011, (14 pages).
`Response to CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Notice of Related Case, in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, May 26, 2011, (8
`pages).
`Sud-ChemieAG’s Memorandum in Support of Its Motion to Dismiss
`for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, in the Matter of CSP Technologies,
`Inc., Plantiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. andAirsec S.A.S,
`Defendants, In the United States District Court for the Southern
`District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv
`00029-RLY-WGH, May 19, 2011, (11 pages).
`Sud-Chemie AG’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdic
`tion, in the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie
`AG, Sud-Chemie Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United
`States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany
`Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, May 19,
`2011, (4 pages).
`Sud-Chemie Inc.’s and AIRSEC S.A.S.’s Answer, Af?rmative
`Defenses and Counterclaims, in the Matter of CSP Technologies,
`Inc., Plantiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and AIRSEC
`S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for the South
`
`ern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 11
`cv-00029-RLY-WGH, May 19, 2011, (29 pages).
`Declaration of Edgar Binnemann in Support of Defendant Sud
`Chemie AG’s Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2), in the
`Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud
`Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, May 19, 2011, (5
`pages).
`Summons in a Civil Action to Sud-Chemie, Inc., in the Matter of CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Paintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and
`Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for the
`Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No.
`4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 14, 2011, (3 pages).
`Summons in a Civil Action to Airsec S.A.S., in the Matter of CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.
`and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for
`the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action
`No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 14, 2011, (3 pages).
`Summons in a Civil Action to Sud-Chemie AG, in the Matter of CSP
`Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc.
`and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for
`the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action
`No. 4:11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 14, 2011, (3 pages).
`Plaintiff CSP Technologies, Inc.’s Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement, in
`the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-Chemie AG,
`Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Indiana New Albany Divi
`sion, Civil Action No. 4: 11-cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 11, 2011, (2
`pages).
`Civil Cover Sheet, in the Matter of CSP Technologies, Inc., Plaintiff,
`v. Sud-Chemie AG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. and Airsec S.A.S, Defendants,
`In the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
`New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 1 1-cv-00029-RLY-WGH,
`Mar. 11, 2011, (3 pages).
`Complaint for Patent Infringement, in the Matter of CSP Technolo
`gies, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Sud-ChemieAG, Sud-Chemie, Inc. andAirsec
`S.A.S, Defendants, In the United States District Court for the South
`ern District of Indiana New Albany Division, Civil Action No. 4: 11
`cv-00029-RLY-WGH, Mar. 11, 2011, (34 pages).
`Rucknahme der Klage, in Sachen CSP Technologies, Inc. gegen
`Sud-Chemie AG, 7 O 5212/ 11, Landgericht Munchen I, 7.Zivilkam
`mer, LenbachplatZ 7, 80316 Munchen, Munchen, Jul. 7, 201 1 (With
`drawal of Complaint, In the matter of CSP Technologies, Inc. against
`Sud-Chemie AG, -7 O 5212/ 11-, Munich District Court I, Patent
`Dispute Division, LenbachplatZ 7, 80316 Munich, Munchen, Jul. 7,
`2011); 2 pages.
`die Frist Zur Stellungnahme auf den PKS-Antrag um 3 Wochen, d.h.
`bis Zum 1. Jul. 2011 Zu verlangern, Landgericht Munchen I,
`7.Zivilkammer, LenbachplatZ 7, 80316 Munchen, Munchen, Jun. 10,
`201 1 (We ?rst rais the objection that no security for the legal costs has
`been furnished, In the matter of CSP Technologies, Inc. versus Sud
`Chemie AG, -7 O 5212/11-, Regional Court Munich I, 7th Civil
`Division, 80316 Munich, Munchen, Jul. 7, 2011); 69 pages.
`Klage, der CSP Technologies, Inc., -Klagerin-gegen die Sud-Chemie
`AG, -Beklagte-, Landgericht Munchen I,
`7.Zivilkammer,
`LenbachplatZ 7, 80316 Munchen, Munchen, Mar. 14, 2011 (Action
`of CSP Technologies, Inc., -Plaintiff-, against Sud-Chemie AG, -De
`fendant-, Munich District Court I, Patent Dispute Division,
`LenbachplatZ 7, 80316 Munich, Munucg, Mar. 14, 2011); 70 pages.
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 5
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 1 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 6
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 2 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`15
`
`10F” 8%
`
`I/ (5
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 7
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 3 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 8
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 4 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`116
`
`114 130
`\
`
`.
`22
`
`23"
`
`.
`22
`
`109
`
`92
`
`102
`
`105
`
`1°’ 115
`
`126
`
`“2 Ix
`
`:' """""" "1;; """""" I
`'
`
`//////j///////////// ///
`34,
`
`140‘
`
`\,120
`
`FIG. 7
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 9
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 5 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`FIG. 8
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 10
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013
`
`Sheet 6 0f 10
`
`US 8,528,778 B2
`
`CLARIANTX 1001 Page 11
`
`

`

`US. Patent
`
`Sep. 10, 2013